Supervisor-Subordinate Age Dissimilarity and Its Impact on Supervisory Ratings of Employability: Does Supportive Learning Context Make a Difference?

Status incongruence resulting from a supervisor who is younger than their subordinate potentially leads to age stereotyping of employees. This article investigates the relationship between age difference and supervisory ratings of five competence-based measures of subordinate employability (Occupational Expertise, Anticipation/Optimisation, Personal Flexibility, Corporate Sense, and Balance). In addition, we consider the buffering role of a supportive learning context which allows older workers access to learning resources. Learning context is represented by duration of the supervisory relationship, perceived organizational learning climate and participation in, and application of, training and development. Using 295 dyads of employees and their direct supervisors in a Dutch building company, findings show that age dissimilarity reflecting status incongruence was related to lower supervisory ratings of Occupational Expertise (job-related competence) and Corporate Sense (social/organizational competence) regardless of learning context. Longer duration relationships exacerbated, rather than buffered, the age difference effect on some types of supervisory ratings. The implications of these findings for age stereotyping with regard to employability are considered.

In Leaders We Trust, or Should We? Supervisors’ Dark Triad Personality Traits and Ratings of Team Performance and Innovation

Our study tests in a sample of 87 organizational groups (297 employees and 87 supervisors) the mediating role of leader-member exchange (LMX) and collective narcissism in the relationship between supervisors’ dark triad (SDT) personality traits and ratings of team outcomes made by supervisors and team members. We show that LMX mediates the association between SDT and team performance and innovation as rated by team members, while collective narcissism mediates the association between SDT and supervisory ratings of team innovation and team performance. Moreover, collective narcissism also mediates the association between SDT and team innovation as rated by team members. Results show that team-level performance appraisal is influenced by supervisory attributes and that the quality of relational exchanges and collective narcissism are plausible mechanisms explaining this association. The use of supervisory ratings of team outcomes in empirical research should also account for the supervisory attributes.

Antecedents and outcomes of Hungarian nurses’ career adaptability

Purpose With the ageing global population the demand for nursing jobs and the requirements for complex care provision are increasing. In consequence, nursing professionals need to be ready to adapt, obtain variety of skills and engage in career self-management. The purpose of this paper is to investigate individual, micro-level, resources and behaviors that can facilitate matching processes between nursing professionals and their jobs. Design/methodology/approach A survey-based study was conducted among 314 part-time and full-time nursing professionals in Hungary. Findings Consistent with the career construction theory, this study offers evidence on career adaptability as a self-regulatory resource that might stimulate nurses’ adaptation outcomes. Specifically, it demonstrates positive relationships between adaptive readiness (proactive personality and conscientiousness), career adaptability, adapting behaviors (career planning and proactive skill development) and adaptation outcomes (employability and in-role performance). Research limitations/implications The cross-sectional design limits causal inference. Relatively small sample of full-time professionals for whom supervisory-ratings were obtained yields the need of further replication. Practical implications Stimulating development of nurses’ career adaptability, career planning, and proactive skill development can contribute to sustainable career management. It can facilitate the alignment of nurses to performance requirements of their current jobs, preventing individual person-job mismatch. Originality/value Zooming into the context of nursing professionals in Hungary, the study elucidates the understudied link between adaptivity and adapting responses and answers the call for more research that employs other-ratings of adaptation outcomes. It demonstrates the value of career adaptability resources for nurses’ employability and in-role performance.

A Meta-Analysis of Gender Proportionality Effects on Job Performance

Critical mass theory and the tokenism hypothesis propose that females’ job performance is adversely affected by perceptions and experiences that stem from females comprising a smaller proportion of organizations than males. Although belief in the gender token effect appears to be widely held, empirical evidence of this effect is relatively scarce; furthermore, the evidence that does exist is somewhat inconsistent. The purpose of the present study was to provide a meta-analytic test of the gender token effect by examining the extent to which the proportion of females in organizations relates to male–female differences in job performance. Meta-analytic results based on data from 158 independent studies ( N = 101,071) reveal that (a) females tend to demonstrate higher job performance than males ( d = −.10), and (b) this difference does not appear to vary based on the proportion of females in organizations. We found similar results for subjective task performance (e.g., supervisory ratings), organizational citizenship behaviors, and objective task performance (e.g., sales). Overall, this study’s results demonstrate almost no support for the gender token effect on job performance, which challenges the prevailing assumptions of critical mass theory and the tokenism hypothesis.

Agreement on service performance ratings between frontline employees and their supervisor

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine whether agreement between frontline employee self-ratings and supervisory ratings of service performance functions as an indicator of healthy supervisor-subordination relationships above and beyond what might be indicated simply by either supervisory ratings or self-ratings. Design/methodology/approach Research hypotheses were tested using a sample of 220 matched pairs of frontline service workers and their immediate supervisors from nine full service hotels in the USA. Findings The results show that higher levels of agreement in service performance ratings between employees and supervisors is associated with higher levels of leader-member exchange (LMX) and organizational commitment. Practical implications Senior managers can refer to the level of performance rating agreement between customer service employees and their supervisors in assessing supervisors’ competency to manage their work relationship with their subordinates. Originality/value This study examined rating agreement in a service performance context and found rating agreement between subordinates and their supervisor may have a unique effect on service worker effectiveness, producing a unique incremental effect on LMX and organizational commitment. This is important given that few attempts have been made to examine service performance from both subordinates’ and supervisors’ perspectives and the implication that rating agreement may have for improving employee service performance.

Trajectory classes of job performance

Purpose – Previous literature has recognized the variability of job performance, calling attention to the inter-individual differences in performance change. Building on Murphy’s (1989) theoretical model of performance, the purpose of this paper is to verify the existence of two distinct classes of performance, reflecting stable and increasing trends, and to investigate which personal conditions prompt the inclusion of individuals in one class rather than the other. Design/methodology/approach – Overall job performance was obtained from supervisory ratings for four consecutive years for 410 professionals of a large Italian company going through significant reorganization. Objective data were merged with employees’ organizational tenure and self-efficacy. Growth Mixture Modeling was used. Findings – Two main groups were identified: the first one started at higher levels of performance and showed a stable trajectory over time (stable class); the second group started at lower levels and reported an increasing trajectory (increasing class). Employees’ with stronger efficacy beliefs and lower tenure were more likely to belong to the stable class. Originality/value – Through a powerful longitudinal database, the nature, the structure and the inter-individual differences in job performance over time are clarified. The study extends Murphy’s (1989) model, showing how transition stages in job performance may occur also as a result of organizational transformation. Moreover, it demonstrates the essential role of self-efficacy in maintaining high performance levels over time.

Is the empirical validity of prior experience for performance affected by rating approach?

Purpose – In the public sector, Training and Experience (T & E) exams assess prior experience and are one of the most often used methods for selecting job applicants. This study uses a KSA approach, where raters judge the quality of job relevant prior experience, not its duration or quantity. It was hypothesized that an additional rater and a consensus meeting between raters would increase reliability and validity. Design/methodology/approach – T & E and supervisory ratings were obtained over a 12-year period for 166 candidates seeking promotion to a budget analyst position. Validity was measured by the correlation between T & E scores and supervisory ratings. Consensus was required only for T & E scores differing by a specific amount (hybrid consensus). Findings – Intraclass reliability was 0.73, 0.84, and 0.95 in the one-rater, two-rater, and hybrid consensus conditions with each coefficient greater than the next (p < 0.05) showing the benefit of multiple raters and consensus for reliability. Validity was significant at 0.21, 0.26, and 0.251 for each rating condition, respectively (two-tail test; p < 0.01). Validity was greater in the two-rater condition than in the one-rater condition (one-tail test; p < 0.05). Consensus did not improve validity beyond that of two raters. For consensus T & Es (n=76), two raters improved validity (one-tail test; p < 0.05), moving from 0.112 to 0.231 but not reliability; consensus improved reliability (two-tail test; p < 0.05) but not validity. Originality/value – There has been a vacuum in T & E research for close to 20 years. Validity data are difficult to obtain but critical for meta-analysis. T & Es showed validity. Use of two raters improved validity but consensus did not increase the gain.

Inconsistent Regulators: Evidence from Banking *

We find that regulators can implement identical rules inconsistently due to differences in their institutional design and incentives, and this behavior may adversely impact the effectiveness with which regulation is implemented. We study supervisory decisions of U.S. banking regulators and exploit a legally determined rotation policy that assigns federal and state supervisors to the same bank at exogenously set time intervals. Comparing federal and state regulator supervisory ratings within the same bank, we find that federal regulators are systematically tougher, downgrading supervisory ratings almost twice as frequently as do state supervisors. State regulators counteract these downgrades to some degree by upgrading more frequently. Under federal regulators, banks report worse asset quality, higher regulatory capital ratios, and lower return on assets. Leniency of state regulators relative to their federal counterparts is related to costly outcomes, such as higher failure rates and lower repayment rates of government assistance funds. The discrepancy in regulator behavior is related to different weights given by regulators to local economic conditions and, to some extent, differences in regulatory resources. We find no support for regulator self-interest, which includes “revolving doors” as a reason for leniency of state regulators.